From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753040AbbKXITf (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 24 Nov 2015 03:19:35 -0500
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:54214 "EHLO newverein.lst.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752161AbbKXITe (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 24 Nov 2015 03:19:34 -0500
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:19:32 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Andreas Herrmann <aherrmann@suse.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] blk-mq and I/O scheduling
Message-ID: <20151124081932.GA30083@lst.de>
References: <20151119120235.GA7966@suselix.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20151119120235.GA7966@suselix.suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Andreas,

I don't understand the time slicing algorithm to well, but from the
blk-mq integration perspective this looks nice, and anything that
helps improving blk-mq for spinning rust is useful.

As a nitpick some of the larger "if (use_time_slice)" blocks should
be moved into separate helper functions‥